44 research outputs found

    Sub-threshold depression and antidepressants use in a community sample: searching anxiety and finding bipolar disorder

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To determine the use of antidepressants (ADs) in people with sub-threshold depression (SD); the lifetime prevalence of mania and hypomania in SD and the link between ADs use, bipolarity and anxiety disorders in SD.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Study design: community survey. Study population: samples randomly drawn, after stratification from the adult population of municipal records. Sample size: 4999 people from seven areas within six Italian regions. Tools: Questionnaire on psychotropic drug consumption, prescription; Structured Clinical Interview NP for DSM-IV modified (ANTAS); Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D); Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ); Short Form Health Survey (SF-12). SD definition: HAM-D > 10 without lifetime diagnosis of Depressive Episode (DE).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>SD point prevalence is 5.0%. The lifetime prevalence of mania and hypomania episodes in SD is 7.3%. Benzodiazepines (BDZ) consumption in SD is 24.1%, followed by ADs (19.7%). In SD, positive for MDQ and comorbidity with Panic Disorder (PD) or Generalized Anxiety Disorders (GAD) are associated with ADs use, whereas the association between a positive MDQ and ADs use, without a diagnosis of PD or GAD, is not significant. Only in people with DE the well-being (SF-12) is higher among those using first-line antidepressants compared to those not using any medication. In people with SD no significant differences were found in terms of SF-12 score according to drug use.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study suggests caution in prescribing ADs to people with SD. In people with concomitant anxiety disorders and SD, it should be mandatory to perform a well-designed assessment and evaluate the presence of previous manic or hypomanic symptoms prior to prescribing ADs.</p

    The role of miniaturization in the evolution of the mammalian jaw and middle ear

    Get PDF
    The evolution of the mammalian jaw is one of the most important innovations in vertebrate history, and underpins the exceptional radiation and diversification of mammals over the last 220 million years. In particular, the transformation of the mandible into a single tooth-bearing bone and the emergence of a novel jaw joint—while incorporating some of the ancestral jaw bones into the mammalian middle ear—is often cited as a classic example of the repurposing of morphological structures. Although it is remarkably well-documented in the fossil record, the evolution of the mammalian jaw still poses the paradox of how the bones of the ancestral jaw joint could function both as a joint hinge for powerful load-bearing mastication and as a mandibular middle ear that was delicate enough for hearing. Here we use digital reconstructions, computational modelling and biomechanical analyses to demonstrate that the miniaturization of the early mammalian jaw was the primary driver for the transformation of the jaw joint. We show that there is no evidence for a concurrent reduction in jaw-joint stress and increase in bite force in key non-mammaliaform taxa in the cynodont–mammaliaform transition, as previously thought. Although a shift in the recruitment of the jaw musculature occurred during the evolution of modern mammals, the optimization of mandibular function to increase bite force while reducing joint loads did not occur until after the emergence of the neomorphic mammalian jaw joint. This suggests that miniaturization provided a selective regime for the evolution of the mammalian jaw joint, followed by the integration of the postdentary bones into the mammalian middle ear

    Efficacy and safety of alirocumab in reducing lipids and cardiovascular events.

    Get PDF

    A new specimen of Prolacerta broomi from the lower Fremouw Formation (Early Triassic) of Antarctica, its biogeographical implications and a taxonomic revision

    Get PDF
    Prolacerta broomi is an Early Triassic archosauromorph of particular importance to the early evolution of archosaurs. It is well known from many specimens from South Africa and a few relatively small specimens from Antarctica. Here, a new articulated specimen from the Fremouw Formation of Antarctica is described in detail. It represents the largest specimen of Prolacerta described to date with a nearly fully articulated and complete postcranium in addition to four skull elements. The study of this specimen and the re-evaluation of other Prolacerta specimens from both Antarctica and South Africa reveal several important new insights into its morphology, most notably regarding the premaxilla, manus, and pelvic girdle. Although well-preserved skull material from Antarctica is still lacking for Prolacerta, a detailed comparison of Prolacerta specimens from Antarctica and South Africa corroborates previous findings that there are no characters clearly distinguishing the specimens from these different regions and therefore the Antarctic material is assigned to Prolacerta broomi. The biogeographical implications of these new findings are discussed. Finally, some osteological characters for Prolacerta are revised and an updated diagnosis and phylogenetic analysis are provided
    corecore